HL Deb 23 May 1989 vol 508 cc363-84

Publication of proposal for order containing mandatory provisions— 3.—(1) This paragraph applies where the Secretary of State proposes to make an order under section 31B of this Act which—

  1. (a) makes or modifies any such provision as is authorised by subsection (4)(a) of that section; and
  2. (b) in doing so, contains provision which is not of one of the following descriptions, that is to say—
    1. (i) provision reproducing existing provisions without modification and in relation to substantially the same area; and
    2. (ii) provision modifying any existing provisions so as to make them less onerous.
(2) The Secretary of State shall, before making any such order as is mentioned in sub-paragraph (1) above—
  1. (a) publish a notice with respect to the proposed order at least once in each of two successive weeks, in one or more newspapers circulating in the locality in relation to which the proposed order will have effect;
  2. (b) not later than the date on which that notice is first published, serve a copy of the notice on the river purification authority and on every local authority whose area includes the whole or any part of that locality; and
  3. (c) publish a notice in the Edinburgh Gazette which—
    1. (i) names every local authority on whom a notice is required to be served under this paragraph;
    2. (ii) specifies a place where a copy of the proposed order and of any relevant map or plan may be inspected; and
    3. (iii) gives the name of every newspaper in which the notice required by virtue of paragraph (a) above was published and the date of an issue containing the notice.
 (3) The notice required by virtue of sub-paragraph (2)(a) above to be published with respect to any proposed order shall—
  1. (a) state the general effect of the proposed order;
    2. 364
  2. (b) specify a place where a copy of the proposed order and of any relevant map or plan may be inspected by any person free of charge at all reasonable times during the period of twenty-eight days beginning with the date of the first publication of the notice; and
  3. (c) state that any person may, within that period, by notice to the Secretary of State object to the making of the order.

Supply of copies of proposed orders 4. The Secretary of State shall, at the request of any person and on payment by that person of such charge (if any) as the Secretary of State may reasonably require, furnish that person with a copy of any proposed order of which notice has been published under paragraph 3 above.

Modifications of proposals 5.—(1) Where notices with respect to any proposed order have been published and served in accordance with paragraph 3 above and the period of twenty-eight days mentioned in sub-paragraph (3)(b) of that paragraph has expired, the Secretary of State may make the order either in the proposed terms or, subject to sub-paragraph (2) below (but without any further compliance with paragraph 3 above), in those terms as modified in such manner as he thinks fit, or may decide not to make any order. (2) The Secretary of State shall not make such a modification of a proposed order of which notice has been so published and served as he considers is likely adversely to affect any persons unless he has given such notices as he considers appropriate for enabling those persons to object to the modification. (3) Subject to sub-paragraph (2) above and to the service of notices of the proposed modification on such local authorities as appear to him to be likely to be interested in it, the modifications that may be made by the Secretary of State include any modification of the area designated by the proposed order as a nitrate sensitive area.

Consideration of objections etc. 6. Without prejudice to section 96 of this Act, where notices with respect to any proposed order have been published and served in accordance with paragraph 3 above, the Secretary of State may, if he considers it appropriate to do so, hold a local inquiry before deciding whether or not to make the proposed order or to make it with modifications.

Consent of Treasury for payment provisions 7. The consent of the Treasury shall be required for the making of any order under section 31B of this Act the making of which does not require the consent of the Treasury by virtue of paragraph 1 above but which contains any such provision as is authorised by subsection (4)(b) of that section. 8. In this Part, "local authority" means a regional, islands or district council." ").

The noble Earl said: These amendments are all consequential. I beg to move them en bloc.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Schedule 22, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 164 [Directions in the interests of national security etc.]:

Lord Hesketh moved Amendment No. 423:

Page 163, line 44, after ("likely") insert ("in relation to any area").

The noble Lord said: Amendment No. 423 is a technical amendment. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 164, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 165 agreed to.

Lord Hesketh moved Amendment No. 423A: After Clause 165, insert the following new clause:

("Indemnities in respect of fluoridation .—(1) The Secretary of State may, with the consent of the Treasury, agree to indemnify any statutory water undertaker in respect of such of any of the following as he thinks fit, that is to say—

  1. (a) liabilities incurred by the undertaker in connection with anything done by the undertaker for the purpose of increasing the fluoride content of any water supplied by the undertaker;
  2. (b) costs or expenses which are incurred by the undertaker, or for which the undertaker is liable, in connection with any proceedings which have been or may be brought by any person with respect to—
(i) things done for the purpose of increasing the fluoride content of any water; or (ii) a proposal to increase the fluoride content of any water;
  1. (c) expenditure incurred by the undertaker in complying with an order made in any such proceedings;
  2. (d) liabilities transferred to the undertaker in accordance with a scheme under Schedule 2 or 5 to this Act which, in relation to the person from whom they were transferred, were liabilities falling within paragraph (a) above or liabilities in respect of costs, expenses or other expenditure mentioned in sub-paragraph (b) or (c) above.
 (2) In this section "statutory water undertaker" means—
  1. (a) any water undertaker or, in relation to any time before the transfer date, any water authority or any statutory water company within the meaning of the 1973 Act; or
  2. (b) any water authority within the meaning of the Water (Scotland) Act 1980.").

The noble Lord said: In moving Amendment No. 423A I should like also to speak to Amendment No. 453. This is a new clause which will give a statutory power to enable the Secretary of State for Health to indemnify water undertakers against costs or expenses incurred in connection with increasing the fluoride content of drinking water. It does not specify the exact terms of the indemnity which is being negotiated with the water industry and, as shown in the preamble to the clause, must be agreeable to the Treasury. I beg to move.

Earl Baldwin of Bewdley

I believe that I am not alone in viewing this amendment with serious misgivings. I believe that any measure which makes the fluoridation of further water supplies more likely should be resisted. This amendment would have that effect.

I shall be brief since this is not the occasion for a full dress review of the arguments against fluoridation. The freedom issue comes first. To treat a person against his or her will, which is what happens to many when a substance is put in the water supply, is a quite unjustified infringement of personal liberty. In terms of basic medical ethics I still find it hard to believe that the dental and medical professions should have given their backing to such a thing. Further than that, it is surely proper practice for doctors or dentists to control the dose that they give their patients. One milligram per litre is not a dose; it is a concentration. Those who drink more will get more fluoride in their bodies. That is inevitable.

Some of us were fortunate the other evening to hear a talk in one of the committee rooms from a distinguished dentist, Dr. Colquhoun, who had been in the forefront of the fluoridation campaign in New Zealand and who changed his mind after a world study tour and a hard look at the research findings. I had known for some time about the dangers of fluoride even at low concentrations and of the manifold symptoms that it can produce which are very hard to detect except by those who are alerted to it, who know exactly what to look for and who do not have a particular case to make.

The notion that fluoride can target one's teeth without affecting any other part of the body is curious. What I had not realised was the weakness of the case for any claimed benefits in the reduction of dental decay. Here we are in the realm of the interpretation of statistics. Dr. Colquhoun is not the only expert to claim that the way the case for fluoridation has been presented has been seriously misleading. Two facors to be aware of are that caries is in decline in any event for reasons that have nothing to do with fluoride and that there are plenty of instances of better teeth being found in non-fluoridated areas than in fluoridated.

Add to this the fact that it is common ground that fluoride has no benefits for teeth once they are fully formed—that is, after the age of puberty—and one can understand why water companies are chary of being involved in such an enterprise without the promise of indemnity if something goes wrong. There is something strange in the Government talking here of indemnities concerning a substance which they have always argued was free of risk. It does not quite add up.

As a taxpayer, I do not welcome the possibility of public money being made available in such a cause. Fluoridation is expensive and unethical. It is also harmful. While I would not want to press matters at this stage, I would ask the Government at least to think again on this afterthought of an amendment.

Lord Brougham and Vaux

I speak on behalf of my noble friend Lord Colwyn, who unfortunately cannot be here at this hour of the morning since he is due in his practice at 8.30 for an extraction. He has asked me to thank my noble friend the Minister for moving the amendment and to say how much he supports it. It is very unlikely that the indemnity will be used, since fluoridation has been used in this country since the mid-1950s and has been shown to be perfectly safe. I am most grateful to my noble friend the Minister.

Lord Trafford

I wish to add my support for the amendment, which I think is a good one. I personally reject the evidence given and comments made by the noble Earl, Lord Baldwin, as I think the case for fluoridation has been well proven on a number of scores. I therefore support the amendment.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 166 agreed to.

4 a.m.

Clause 167 [General restrictions on disclosure of information]:

[Amendments Nos. 424 and 425 had been wihdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

Lord Hesketh moved Amendments Nos. 426,427, 428 and 429:

Page 165, line 29, after ("Supply;") insert— ("( ) the Director General of Electricity Supply;").

Page 165, line 45, at end insert— ("( ) for the purpose of facilitating the carrying out by the Health and Safety Commission or the Health and Safety Executive of any of its functions under any enactment or of facilitating the carrying out by any enforcing authority, within the meaning of Part I of the Health and Safety at Work Etc. Act 1974, of any functions under a relevant statutory provision, within the meaning of that Act;").

Page 165, line 47, leave out ("or the Health and Safety Executive of any of his or its") and insert ("of any of his").

Page 166, line 20, at end insert—

("( ) the Electricity Act 1989;").

The noble Lord said: These are all technical amendments. I beg to move.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 430 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

Clause 167, as amended, agreed to.

Clauses 168 to 170 agreed to.

Baroness Blatch moved Amendment No. 430A:

Before Clause 171, insert the following new clause:

("Powers of Entry.

.—(1) Where any right of entry is conferred on a water undertaker or sewerage undertaker by any of the provisions of this Act the following provisions of this section shall apply. (2) Admission to any premises shall not be demanded as of right (except in an emergency) unless 24 hours notice of the intended entry has been given to the occupier. (3) In this section references to an emergency includes
  1. (a) any danger to persons or property;
  2. (b) any interruption of a supply of water provided to any premises;
  3. (c) any interruption of the provision of sewerage services to any premises; and
  4. (d) the possibility of contamination, waste or misuse of water.".

The noble Baroness said: I apologise as the explanation will be a little lengthy but I shall present it as quickly as possible. There are various provisions relating to powers of entry in the Bill. For example, there are provisions in Clause 64 relating to the powers of entry in respect of water supplies, provisions in Clause 143 relating to the NRA, general provisions in Clauses 171 and 172, provisions relating to drought in Clause 129(6), provisions relating to meter readings in Schedule 10, paragraph 1 and provisions relating to laying of mains and sewers in Schedule 18, paragraph 10. There are inconsistencies and anomolies in these various provisions.

In tabling the amendment I am concerned to ensure that, first, whenever there is a possibility of danger to persons or property, a possibility of any interruption to the supply of water provided to any premises, a possibility of any interruption of the provision of sewerage services to any premises or the possibility of contamination, waste or misuse of water, the undertaker has the right to enter premises immediately and without giving notice to the owner or occupier.

Secondly, I wish to ensure that a water undertaker is able to read a water meter without giving advance notice of his intention to the occupier. I shall outline some of the various anomolies contained within the Bill. In the case of contamination, waste or misuse of water, Clause 64 provides that, except in an emergency, no person shall make an entry into any premises to take steps to prevent contamination, waste or misuse of water unless seven days' notice has been given to the occupier. There is no definition of emergency. This amendment would make clear that an emergency includes any circumstances involving the possibility of contamination, waste or misuse of water.

It is in the public interest that water undertakers have immediate access to premises where there is a possibility of contamination of water. If someone is misusing water—for example, using a sprinkler without a licence—it is obviously not appropriate for the undertaker to give advance notice of his intention to visit the premises because the person would obviously not use the sprinkler on the day of inspection.

One of the grounds for obtaining a warrant of entry under Clause 171 is when an application for admission to premises would defeat the object of the proposed entry. The Minister may argue that if a water undertaker wishes to check whether someone is, for example, using a sprinkler, he should obtain a warrant of entry. However, that is not practical on a large scale check as to the use of sprinklers.

In a case of drought, Clause 129(6) provides that every drought order shall contain a provision requiring the water undertaker or the NRA to give not less than 24 hours notice of the intended entry to land. There is no provision for immediate entry in the case of emergency. Obviously in a drought situation, time is short but there will be no provision for immediate entry in the event of drought. This amendment would treat a drought situation where there is a threat of interruption to the water supply as an emergency and, therefore, notice of entry need not be given.

In the case of meter reading, Schedule 10(1)(b) to the Bill provides that a water undertaker shall not enter the premises for the purposes of meter reading unless seven days' notice of the intended entry has been given to the occupier. It is obviously impractical for a water undertaker to give an occupier seven days' notice in advance of meter reading. The power of entry provisions in Schedule 10 do not distinguish between entry for the purpose of carrying out works and entry for the purpose of meter reading. It is appropriate for undertakers to give seven days' notice for carrying out work on premises but routine meter reading should be in a separate category and advance notice should not be required.

Subsection (2) of the amendment provides that admission to any premises should not be demanded as a right unless 24 hours notice of entry had been given. That wording is based on a similar provision in the Water Act 1945. There is obviously a difference between saying that admission shall not be demanded as a right, as my amendment proposes, and the provision as Schedule 10 to the Water Bill at present provides that an undertaker shall not enter except after giving seven days, notice of intended entry.

This is a probing amendment because it is not possible to tackle all the problems of the power of entry provisions in one amendment. However, I have highlighted some problems as regards the power of entry provisions in the Bill. I should not expect my noble friend to incorporate this amendment into the Bill as it stands but I ask him to confirm that he will look at the problems which I have highlighted and consider adopting my suggested amendment and applying it to the various powers of entry provisions in the Bill or—which would perhaps be even better—putting one composite power of entry provision into the Bill.

Water and sewerage undertakers and the NRA will often be asked under what power they are proposing to enter premises. It will obviously be more convenient if there were to be one power of entry provision in the Bill rather than the numerous provisions which there are at present scattered around the Bill.

In relation to the powers of entry, the Water Bill is obviously a composite of the present policies of legislation, and the opportunity has not been taken to draw together the various strands relating to powers of entry. I should like to see the various strands drawn together. I beg to move.

Lord Hesketh

The Bill provides powers of entry as of right to private property only where those powers are essential for undertakers to fulfil their statutory functions. Proper safeguards are provided for occupiers of premises in terms of the requirements for notice to be served, and for entry to be exercised at a reasonable time.

There are also the new stipulations that an appropriate authorisation is produced by an officer exercising the power of entry whether or not the occupier has asked to see it and that anyone impersonating an officer is liable to be found guilty of a criminal offence.

In most cases the Bill requires undertakers to give seven days notice to the occupier of the premises concerned. The exceptions are where undertakers are checking on the wholesomeness of drinking water or enforcing regulations to prevent contamination of the water supply, where we consider 24 hours notice is justified. I am sure Members of the Committee will agree a shorter notice period is apt in these particular circumstances. Generally, however, I do not see that it is appropriate for undertakers to have the right to enter private premises after serving such a short period of notice.

In real emergencies, where property or premises are endangered perhaps by interruptions to supply caused by burst pipes, or contamination, the appropriate clauses of the Bill already provide for immediate entry to remedy the situation. Otherwise Clause 171 provides for immediate entry to premises when a justice's warrant is obtained. This might, for example, be in situations the noble Baroness might define as emergencies, where misuse of water is suspected and the serving of a notice would defeat the object of the proposed entry. But entry would not be as of right. A magistrate would need to be satisfied first that entry was justified in the particular circumstances. This is a useful and practical control, very much in line with police procedures as noble Lords will recognise.

The granting to privatised utilities of rights of entry to private properties is a matter deserving serious consideration. In preparing the Bill we have been careful to ensure that they are justified by the seriousness of the breach of the law to which they relate. Our guiding principle has been that the inconvenience and disruption caused to occupiers of premises must be outweighted by the necessary benefit to public health and safety.

I believe the Bill's provisions strike the right balance. For non-critical matters, occupiers will be given seven days notice, which we regard as reasonable, before entry can be obtained to their premises without their consent. As I have outlined, adequate provision is already made for immediate entry in emergencies or where offences are suspected to be being committed. The new clause proposed by my noble friend is therefore unnecessary in some respects and I hope that she will agree to pursue it no further.

Baroness Blatch

I have often contemplated a speed reading course, but I shall go in for a speed listening course. I will read that reply with great interest and in the meantime I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 171 [Warrant to exercise power]:

[Amendments Nos. 431 and 432 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

Clause 171 agreed to.

Clause 172 [Provisions supplementary to powers of entry etc]:

[Amendment No. 432A not moved.]

Clause 172 agreed to.

Clauses 173 to 177 agreed to.

Clause 178 [Powers to make regulations]:

[Amendment No. 433 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

Clause 178 agreed to.

Clause 179 agreed to.

Schedule 23 [Procedure relating to Byelaws]:

Lord Greenway moved Amendment No. 434:

Page 317, line 4, after ("Gazette") insert ("and in one or more local newspapers circulating in the area to which the byelaw is to apply").

The noble Lord said: Under Schedule 23, the procedure relating to by-laws: A relevant body shall, at least one month before it applies for the confirmation of any byelaw … cause a notice of its intention to make the application to be published in the London Gazette and in such other manner as it considers appropriate".

The Inland Waterways Association in particular relies on local bodies and individual members to spot proposals in local newspapers. Publication of notices just in the London Gazette in respect of applications for confirmation of by-laws is thus likely to be missed. It also appears to be contrary to the usual practice. This amendment requires publication in local newspapers where the by-law is to apply. I beg to move.

The Earl of Arran

This amendment would have the seemingly entirely innocuous effect of ensuring that an intention to promote a by-law should be advertised in the local area affected by it, via local newspapers. There is a technical objection to accepting the amendment as it stands; namely, that some areas do not have local newspapers. That is why provisions aimed at local publicity generally refer only to "newspapers circulating within the area affected".

However, the essential objection to accepting it is a much more substantial one. Substantial it may be, but brief I shall be. By-laws relating to, let us say, angling or canoeing, would be likely to affect people well outside the area local to the stretch of river concerned. The local interest might, indeed, be quite marginal in some cases. The most effective way of reaching the target audience might, therefore, be through the appropriate special-interest magazines, for instance. Advertisements in local newspapers could be a waste of money.

One has to remember that this schedule relates also, among other things, to the NRA's powers under Clause 110 to make by-laws controlling pollution from boats. Boat owners do not always live in the locality of the harbour or marina affected by such by-laws, so again a duty always to use local newspapers would be an onerous and wasteful one. The existing provision in this schedule therefore quite rightly leaves it up to the discretion of the NRA, as well as the undertakers, to decide what is the best means of ensuring that those likely to be affected are alerted to a proposed by-law. Naturally, they will use the local press where appropriate. On that basis, I hope I can persuade the noble Lord to withdraw this amendment.

Lord Greenway

I note the noble Earl's objections to the amendment. At this stage I will do no more than ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Schedule 23 agreed to.

Clauses 180 and 181 agreed to.

4.15 a.m.

Clause 182 [General interpretation]:

The Earl of Radnor moved Amendment No. 434A:

Pasge 175, line 4, at end insert—

(" "container" in relation to water analysis means a clean and sterile container of any other description;").

The noble Earl said: This is a fairly simple amendment. Under Clause 144, which is concerned with water analysis, the water to be analysed has to be divided three ways and put into a container. I could find nothing in the Bill to describe the kind of container. It seemed obvious to me that the container had to be sterile. The analysis of water is a very precise science. I have endeavoured to describe it here and to put it in this part of the Bill where the definitions are. I perceive that my amendment is in fact faulty because I say a, container of any other description".

That would be quite unsuitable. For instance, if water was put into a sterile lead container it would still take up the lead and that would not be suitable. I think that is probably of importance. I beg to move.

Lord Hesketh

There is no need to explicitly require that these containers be clean and sterile, for if they are not clean and sterile they clearly cannot be used for analysis because they would contaminate the samples. And clearly in such circumstances the court will be unlikely to rely on the evidence. Any evidence would of course by challenged on these grounds. In any case, the Water Resources Act 1963—which currently imposes a similar requirement on the water authorities to divide in three and seal in containers those samples which the authorities may use in prosecutions—contains no definition of container and makes no mention of the need for containers to be clean and sterile. I hope that my noble friend will be able to withdraw his amendment.

The Earl of Radnor

That is a totally unsatisfactory answer. That is precisely why I tabled this amendment—so that there would not be particles and that kind of thing in it. That is the whole point of the amendment. Though I shall withdraw the amendment, I shall certainly bring it forward again because the whole analysis performance in this Bill seems to be thoroughly unsatisfactory. As my noble friend realises, I have had a great deal of experience—I am a large fish farmer—of people coming and analysing water. They live with it practically every day. I can assure my noble friend that it is very important that the matter is dealt with properly and that it is not left to the courts to guess whether or not there were particles floating about. Although I beg leave to withdraw the amendment now, I shall most certainly bring it forward again.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

[Amendment No. 435 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled list.]

Lord Hesketh moved Amendments Nos. 43 5A and 435B:

Page 179, line 2, after ("tunnel") insert ("or conduit").

Page 179, line 5, after ("tunnel") insert ("or conduit").

The noble Lord said: These are both technical amendments. I beg to move.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 435C not moved.]

Clause 182, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 183 agreed to.

Schedule 24 [Minor and Consequential Amendments]:

The Earl of Caithness moved Amendment No. 435D:

Page 318, line 41, leave out ("section 6 of").

The noble Earl said: In moving this amendment, with the leave of the Committee I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 435E, 435F, 435H, 435J, 435K and 435M, 436, 436B, 436D, 436E, 438A, 438B, 438C, 438E, 438F, 438G and 438H. These are all technical amendments. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

The Earl of Caithness moved Amendment No. 435E:

Page 319, line 27, at end insert—

("( ) The Authority, a water undertaker or a sewerage undertaker shall be deemed to be a statutory company for the purposes of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1927. ( ) The references in the Civil Defence Act 1939 to public utility undertakers do not include references to the Authority or to any water undertaker or sewerage undertaker and, accordingly, references in that Act to a public utility undertaking do not include references to the undertaking of the Authority or of such an undertaker.").

On Question, amendment agreed to.

The Earl of Caithness moved Amendment No. 435F:

Page 319, line 41, leave out ("National Rivers").

On Question, amendment agreed to.

The Earl of Caithness moved Amendment No. 435G:

Page 320, line 34, at end insert—

("The Public Health (Scotland) Act 1897 (c. 38)

3A. In section 16 of the Public Health (Scotland) Act 1897 (definition of nuisance), in the proviso, after paragraph (b) there shall be inserted the following paragraph— "(c) paragraphs (2) and (3) above shall not apply in relation to the supply of water for domestic purposes within the meaning of section 7 of the Water (Scotland) Act 1980."").

The noble Earl said: I should like to speak also to Amendments Nos. 436A, 436C and 438D. These are minor and consequential amendments to existing enactments. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

The Earl of Caithness moved Amendments Nos. 435H, 435J, 435K, 435L, 435M, 436, 436A, 436B, 436C, 436D, 436E and 438A:

Page 321, line 19, after ("authority") insert (", in the first place where they occur,").

Page 322, line 47, at end insert—

("The Requisitioned Land and War Works Act 1945 (c. 43)

6A. In section 17(1) of the Requisitioned Land and War Works Act 1945 (publication of proposed orders relating to highways)—
  1. (a) in paragraph (b), after the word "water," there shall be inserted the word "sewerage,"; and
  2. (b) after that paragraph there shall be inserted the following paragraph—
 "(bb) to be sent to the National Rivers Authority where the National Rivers Authority has any mains or pipes laid along, across, over or under any such highways as aforesaid; and".").

Page 323, line 36, leave out ("from").

Page 325, line 6, at end insert—

("Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 1949 (c. 75)

9A. In section 28 of the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 1949 (Land Court may grant a certificate of failure to fulfil responsibilities to farm in accordance with rules of good husbandry) at the end there shall be added the words— "Provided that in determining whether to grant a certificate under this section, the Land Court shall disregard any practice adopted by the tenant in compliance with any obligation imposed on him by or accepted by him under section 31B of the Control of Pollution Act 1974."").

Page 325, line 13, after first ("incurred") insert ("by").

Page 325, line 22, at end insert—

("The Public Utilities Street Works Act 1950 (c. 39)

10A. In section 39(1) of the Public Utilities Street Works Act 1950 (interpretation), in the definition of "sewer authority", for the words "the authority" there shall be substituted the words "the person"."). Page 325, line 31, at end insert—

("The Rivers (Prevention of Pollution) (Scotland) Act 1951 (c. 66)

12A. In section 18(6) and section 19(3) of the Rivers (Prevention of Pollution) (Scotland) Act 1951, for the words from "tidal waters" to "an authority" there shall be substituted the words "controlled waters within the meaning of section 30A of the Control of Pollution Act 1974" and for the word "authority's" there shall be substituted the words "river purification authority's"."). Page 326, line 13, at end insert—

("The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1953 (c. 26)

14A. Section 6(2) of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1953 (which makes provision as to access to sewers and other apparatus) shall have effect as if the references to water undertakers included references to the Authority, a water undertaker and a sewerage undertaker.").

Page 326, line 18, at end insert—

("The Valuation and Rating (Scotland) Act 1956 (c, 60)

15A. In section 22A of the Valuation and Rating (Scotland) Act 1956 (exemption of certain fishings from rates) in subsection (1)(c)(ii) for the words from "paragraph 1(a)" onwards there shall be substituted the words "section 28(3)(a) of tha: Act".").

Page 332, line 39, after second ("undertakers") insert ("are").

Page 332, line 41, leave out ("undertaker") and insert ("a watr undertaker is").

Page 333, line 37, after ("(c)") insert ("the National Rivers Authority or").

The noble Earl said: These amendments are all consequential upon previous amendments. I beg to move.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendments Nos. 437 and 438 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

Baroness Blatch moved Amendment No. 438AB:

Page 334, line 6, at end insert—

" . In section 29 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971 (determination of applications) after subsection (4) there shall be inserted the following subsection— "(4A)(1) Before granting planning permission for any development which, in their opinion, is likely to give rise to a need for the provision of water or sewerage services for that development a local planning authority shall consult the relevant water undertaker and the relevant sewerage undertaker. (2) Where under this subsection a local planning authority are required to consult a relevant water undertaker or a relevant sewerage undertaker before granting planning permission—
  1. (i) they shall, unless an applicant has served a copy of an application for planning permission on the relevant water undertaker and relevant sewerage undertaker, give notice of the application to the relevant water undertaker and relevant sewerage undertaker; and
    2. 375
  2. (ii) they shall not determine the application until at least 14 days after the date on which notice is given under paragraph (i), or if earlier, 14 days after the date of service of a copy of the application on the relevant water undertaker and relevant sewerage undertaker by the applicant.
 (3) The local planning authority shall, in determining the application, take into account any representations relating to the provision of water or sewerage services received from the relevant water undertaker and relevant sewerage undertaker.").

The noble Baroness said: The purpose of this amendment is to place local planning authorities under a statutory duty to consult water and sewerage undertakers before granting planning permission for any development which is likely to give rise to a need for the provision of water or sewerage services. Local planning authorities are required to consult with a variety of bodies before determining a planning application. Details are listed in the amendment.

There are six categories of development in respect of which a local planning authority is required to consult a water authority. But all the categories listed in the 1988 general development order relate to interests which will pass to the NRA and not to the water and sewerage undertaker. There is no statutory requirement at present on local planning authorities to consult water authorities in respect of proposed development in their capacity as water or sewerage undertakers. This amendment is an attempt to fill that loophole.

If this amendment is not accepted, there would in future be no requirement on a local planning authority to consult a water or sewerage undertaker. A water or sewerage undertaker would not be aware of the planning application and would therefore not have a chance to make any comments on it. A local planning authority should consult a water undertaker and sewerage undertaker before granting planning permission for any development which will require water or sewerage services. I beg to move.

The Earl of Caithness

I can understand my noble friend's concern but I must say to her that her amendment would involve additional and unnecessary bureaucracy. This is something which she would not favour. It would offer scope for all planning applications likely to give rise to the provision of water or sewerage services, or both, to be referred to the water and sewerage undertaker concerned.

There are more than 600,000 planning applications per year in England, many of which involve development requiring water or sewerage services. Local planning authorities should decide how best to publicise and seek views on individual planning applications and should consult water and sewerage undertakers where that seems necessary. For their part, water and sewerage undertakers should have regard to the provisions of structure plans and local plans in planning their own investment, and their view will be relevant in formulating policy in these plans. My noble friend will be aware of Section 29 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971, which obliges planning authorities in determining planning applications to have regard to the development planned for their area and to all other material considerations. There is usually a very good relationship between the undertaker and the planning authority. I am sure that that will continue in the future.

Baroness Blatch

I thank my noble friend for that reply. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Earl of Caithness moved Amendments Nos. 438B to 438H and 441A:

Page 335, line 38, leave out from ("includes") to ("waters") in line 40 and insert ("land covered with waters where the land is above the low-water mark of ordinary spring tides and the waters are not inland").

Page 337, line 18, at end insert—

("The Coal Industry Act 1975 (c. 56)

41 A. Paragraph 5(3) of Schedule 1 to the Coal Industry Act 1975 (supplementary provisions relating to right to withdraw support) shall have affect as if the reference to a company or other body or person carrying on an undertaking primarily for the supply of water for public purposes or to members of the public included a reference to the Authority, a water undertaker and a sewerage undertaker.").

Page 338, line 37, at end insert—

("(2) In section 65 of that Act (power of council to make charging order)—
  1. (a) in subsection (1) after the words "Register of Sasines" there shall be added the words "or registering it in the Land Register of Scotland, as the case may be;
  2. (b) in subsection (3) after the words "Register of Sasines" there shall be inserted the words "or register in it in the Land Register of Scotland, as the case may be;
  3. (c) in subsection (4) after the words "Register of Sasines" there shall be inserted the words "or (as the case may be) in the Land Register of Scotland in a case where the interest in land affected by the order is registered in that Register";
  4. (d) in subsection (5) after the words "Register of Sasines" there shall be inserted the words "or registered in the Land Register of Scotland, as the case may be"
  5. (e) in subsection (6) after the words "Register of Sasines" there shall be inserted the words "or registered in the Land Register of Scotland, as the case may be";
  6. (f) in subsection (9) at the end there shall be added the words "and shall, on request, be entitled to receive a discharge in respect of the redemption which may be registered notwithstanding its form, in the Register of Sasines or Land Register of Scotland, as the case may.";
  7. (g) in subsection (10) after the word "order" there shall be inserted the words "or discharge".").

Page 339, line 19, at end insert—

("(a) after paragraph 17 there shall be inserted the following paragraph— "17A. the National Rivers Authority"; and (b)").

Page 340, line 29, leave out ("254(4)(a) of that Act (drainage of highway into watercourse),") and insert ("254(4) of that Act (drainage of highway into watercourse)—

  1. (a) in paragraph (a),").

Page 340, line 32, at end insert ("and

  1. (b) in paragraph (b), after the word "culvert," there shall be inserted the word "sewer,".").

Page 343, line 6, at end insert—

("The Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (C. 27)

59a. In paragraph 4 of Schedule 5 to the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (buildings in relation to which a Secretary of State is the appropriate authority for the purposes of section 74 of that Act), for the words "a water authority or by a statutory water company as defined in section 38 of the Water Act 1973" there shall be substituted the words "the National Rivers Authority, a water undertaker or a sewerage undertaker".").

Page 344, line 25, at end insert—

("The Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 (c. 5) 64A. In Part II of Schedule 3 to the Agricultural Holdings Act ]1986—

  1. (a) In paragraph 9 (provisions applicable to Case C—failure to farm in accordance with rules of good husbandry), after sub-paragraph (2) there shall be inserted the following sub-paragraph—
(3) In determining whether to grant a certificate under this paragraph, the Tribunal shall disregard any practice adopted by the tenant in compliance with any obligation accepted by or imposed on the tenant under section (nitrate sensitive areas) of the Water Act 1989."; and
  1. (b) in each of paragraphs 10 and 11 (provisions applicable to Cases D and E), after sub-paragraph (2) there shall be inserted the following sub-paragraph—
 (3) For the purposes of that Case compliance with any obligation accepted by or imposed on the tenant under section (nitrate sensitive areas) of the Water Act 1989 shall not be capable of constituting a breach by the tenant of the terms or conditions of his tenancy." ").

The noble Earl said: These amendments are all consequential on previously agreed amendments. I beg to move.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendments Nos. 439 to 443 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

Schedule 24, as amended, agreed to.

Schedule 25 [Transitional Provisions and Savings]:

The Earl of Arran moved Amendments Nos. 444 and 445:

Page 345, line 45, leave out from ("is") to end of line 46 and insert ("or who has been (whether before, on or after the transfer date) chairman or member of a water authority.").

Page 346, line 45, leave out ("to or in respect of an officer or employee for any other reason") and insert ("for any other reason to or in respect of any person who holds or has held any such office or employment as is mentioned in that sub-paragraph.").

The noble Earl said: These amendments are technical and are intended to ensure that all those with entitlements receive them. I beg to move.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

The Earl of Arran moved Amendment No. 445A:

Page 349, line 25, at end insert—

("( ) So much of any local statutory provision, other than a provision applying or modifying the effect of the said section 39, as has the effect, immediately before the transfer date, that there are different requirements as to the pressure of water in a water main or other pipe of a water authority or statutory water company from those imposed by section 51 of this Act, shall have effect, on and after that date, as if it were contained (in so far as it would qualify the duty imposed by that section) in an order made under subsection (4) of that section in relation to the water undertaker in which that main or other pipe is vested on that date.").

The noble Earl said: On behalf of my noble friend I beg to move Amendment No. 445A. This is a technical amendment to include in the provision pressure requirements contained in any other local statutory provision.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

The Earl of Arran moved Amendments Nos. 445B and 445C:

Page 351, line 25, after ("if") insert—

  1. ("(a)").

Page 351, line 28, at end insert ("and

  1. (b) any reference in the arrangements to any enactment which is repealed by this Act and to which any provision made by this Act corresponds were a reference to the corresponding provision of this Act.").

The noble Earl said: These are straightforward technical amendments which I beg to move en bloc.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 446 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

[Amendments Nos. 446A and 446B not moved.]

The Earl of Arran moved Amendment No. 447:

Page 353, line 8, at end insert— (' ( ) Where any notice served, consent given, reference to arbitration made or other thing done under any provision of Schedule 1 to the Public Utility Transfers and Water Charges Act 1988 (provisions with respect to meters) is in force or effective immediately before the transfer date, that notice, consent, reference or other thing shall have effect on and after that date—

  1. (a) as if it had been served, given, made or done under the corresponding provision of Schedule 10 to this Act; and
  2. (b) in so far as it was served, given, made or done by or in relation to a water authority, as if it had been served, given, made or done by or in relation to that authority's successor company.").

The noble Earl said: On behalf of my noble friend I beg to move Amendment No. 447. This is a technical amendment which I commend to the Committee.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

The Earl of Arran moved Amendment No. 447A: Page 369, line 8, leave out ("section 43 of the said Act of 1967") and insert—

  1. ("(a) section 19 of the said Act of 1967 Act (general rule as to ascertainment of rateable value) shall have effect as if the reference in the definition of "non-industrial building" in that section to premises forming part;, and taken into account in the valuation for rating purposes, of a water undertaking included a reference to any such premises transferred in accordance with a scheme under Schedule 2 to this Act to the Authority or a successor company; and
  2. (b) section 43 of that Act").

The noble Earl said: The purpose of this technical amendment is to clarify the rating position under the General Rate Act 1967 of water hereditaments which are to be transferred to the successor companies and the NRA. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Schedule 25, as amended, agreed to.

Schedule 26 [Repeals]:

The Earl of Arran moved Amendment No. 447B:

Page 371, line 9, at end insert—

("17 & 18 Geo. 5. c. 36 The Landlord and Tenant Act 1927. In section 25(1), in the definition of "statutory company", the word "water,".").

The noble Earl said: In moving Amendment No. 44 7B I should like to speak also to Amendments Nos. 447C, 447H and 447K. These are all technical amendments to Schedule 26 of the Bill which repeals provisions in various enactments which are no longer required as a result of the Bill. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

The Earl of Caithness moved Amendments Nos. 447C, 447D, 447E, 447F, 447G, 447H and 447K:

Page 379, line 16, column 3, after ("(2)") insert ("(a) and (b)").

Page 379, line 25, in column 3 at end insert ("In section 104, in subsection (2) the words "or 53", subsection (3).").

Page 383, line 39, column 3, leave out from ("section") to end of line 40 and insert ("109, in subsection (3), the words "2, 3," and "62", in subsection (4), the words from the beginning to "procedure and" in subsection (5)(a), the words "other than an order under section 62".").

Page 383, line 45, column 3, leave out ("116(1)") and insert ("116, in subsection (1)").

Page 383, line 47, column 3, at end insert ("and in subsection (4), the word "20,".").

Page 384, line 28, column 3, leave out ("Section 14(2)(b).") and insert ("In section 14(2), paragraph (b) and the word "or" immediately preceding it.").

Page 384, line 29, column 3, leave out ("Section 18(2)(b).") and insert ("In section 18(2), paragraph (b) and the word "or" immediately preceding it.").

The noble Earl said: All these amendments are consequential upon previously agreed amendments. I beg to move them en bloc.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Schedule 26, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 184 [Local statutory provisions: consequential amendments etc.]:

4.30 a.m.

Baroness Blatch moved Amendment No. 447KA:

Page 180, line 4, at beginning insert—

(" (A1) Subject to the following provisions of this section, and without prejudice to any other provision of this Act affecting general transitional provision, on and after the transfer date every local statutory provision relating to a function, property, right or liability transferred by or under this Act to a water undertaker or sewerage undertaker, and everything done by or in relation to a water authority under such provision, shall have effect, so far as may be necessary for the purposes of, or in connection with, the said transfer as if—
  1. (a) any reference contained in, or falling to be construed as contained in, any such provision to a water authority were a reference to the relevant undertaker; and
  2. (b) any such thing had been done by or in relation to that undertaker.").

The noble Baroness said: The amendment is designed to provide a "general translation" of references to water authorities in local statutory provisions, so that those will be construed as references to the successor companies in those cases where the Bill does not already indicate what is to happen to such references.

At present, the Bill provides that local statutory provisions relating to functions which are being transferred exclusively to the NRA are to have effect as if references to water authorities were references to the NRA: hence the expression "general translation". Examples of such translations are Clause 138, relating to navigation, conservancy and harbour authority functions, and paragraph 1 of Schedule 16, relating to fisheries.

The Government are known to have considered the problem and officials have expressed an intention to amend the Bill to provide for some form of general translation, while properly stressing the need, which, as I have indicated, the water authorities fully recognise, for eventual identification of those functions in the local statutory provisions which are relevant to both the successor companies and the NRA.

The amendment represents, in the view of the water authorities, an effective way to achieve that general translation. It is subject to the provisions in the Bill which expressly cover other translations, and to the orders to be made in due course under Clause 184. I hope that my noble friend the Minister will feel able at least to say that he accepts it in principle and that he will bring forward his own amendment on Report. I beg to move.

The Earl of Caithness

I have listened with great care to my noble friend. I thought that she had a convincing argument. As the Committee will see, the amendment is starred on the Marshalled List. I hope that my noble friend will permit me to take it away and consider it. I shall be happy to discuss it with her before another stage, when I hope we shall be able to agree an amendment to bring forward to cover the point that she has raised.

Baroness Blatch

I am most grateful for that reply. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Lord Graham of Edmonton moved Amendment No. 447L:

Page 180, line 33, at end insert—

(" ( ) Nothing in this Act or in any order made under this section shall abrogate or curtail the duty of the Thames Water Authority (or any successor company) to maintain and preserve in perpetuity the historic water course known as the New River with a wholesome and sufficient supply of water.").

The noble Lord said: It is gratifying to note that the Chamber fills up immediately my name goes on the Annunciator. I somehow suspect that that is for something that will happen in a few moments. I am sorry to inflict the amendment on the Committee at this late hour—not because of the amendment, but because of the late hour.

I received an excellent brief from the authorities in the area of Haringey, Barnet and Enfield. The amendment is a serious one. The New River, which will be known to many Members in this place, is a historic watercourse originally constructed in the 17th century to bring fresh water from Hertfordshire to the City of London. There is widespread concern among the public, and the local authorities through whose areas it flows, that the future of the New River is at risk and should be safeguarded.

Clause 184 of the Water Bill concerns the power of the Secretary of State or the Minister by order to repeal or amend any relevant local statutory provision. By subsection (4) it is already provided that no order made under that clause may curtail any right of way (or any specified public rights) conferred by a local Act. The new subsection set out in the proposed amendment seeks in a similar way to protect the future of the New River from a too sudden repeal of the obligation of the Thames Water Authority to maintain and preserve that watercourse. That obligation derives from the local statutory provisions.

The New River rises near Ware in Hertfordshire, and it is fed primarily by water from the River Lea. For centuries it has brought fresh water to the City of London. I could say a great deal more about its environmental and ecological benefits.

The purpose of the amendment is to bring before the Committee and the Minister the following facts. In 1985, the Thames Water Authority proposed to declare a major part of the New River redundant. At first the proposal was to be effective southwards of a point at Brookfield Lane, Cheshunt in the area of Broxbourne District Council. However, in 1987 the scheme was modified so that the New River would remain operational to a point at Maidens Brook in the London Borough of Enfield. The remaining length south of Maidens Brook was to become operationally redundant.

In July of last year the TWA's divisional manager indicated in correspondence that the New River from Ware to Maidens Brook, Enfield was to be unchanged; proceeds from TWA's development proposals at Stoke Newington were to be applied in part to pay for maintaining the New River as a valuable feature, including the following measures: maintaining as high a flow as possible; introducing a conservation management plan for the East Reservoir, Stoke Newington; providing public access between Ware and Southbury Road, Enfield; entering into discussions with the local authorities about additional access downstream; and discussing with the London Borough of Enfield the future flow to the Enfield Loop. The purpose of the amendment is to express the unease of the people in the area that under a successor authority the undertakings which are currently accepted by the TWA may not be fully carried out.

May I say before I close on this matter that, as the Marshalled List shows, my noble friend Lady David was set down to oppose the Question that Clause 187 stand part of the Bill. The purpose of that was to allow her to express the views of those who are very concerned, particularly the Ramblers' Association in the Lake District, in respect of a similar situation, where undertakings written in statute are in danger if the successor companies are enabled by this clause to disregard undertakings currently in force. I beg to move.

The Earl of Caithness

The subject of discussion under the amendment is essentially local and specific and it would be, I suggest to the Committee, most improper for it to intrude into general legislation of this kind. For this reason it should not be accepted. But before asking the noble Lord to withdraw the amendment, let me make, within the boundaries of parliamentary propriety, one or two remarks about the matter he has raised.

First, the New River was established by Royal Charter, and in principle it appears to us that any rights or liabilities under it which at present rest with Thames Water will pass, unchanged in any way by this Bill, to the successor bodies.

Secondly, I am given to understand that some of the original rights and liabilities under that charter have since been embodied in local legislation. They, too, will be unaffected by the Bill. Furthermore, I here draw the attention of the noble Lord to subsection (4) of Clause 184, inserted by amendment by the Secretary of State at Report siage in another place, which provides that no order under Section 184 may abrogate or curtail any rights of public access or amenity in local legislation.

Finally, let me make one general observation. I have listened with great care to all the noble Lord has said about the local importance of the New River. But may I ask him to consider two questions? First, is it practicable in fact with the new London Ring Main to maintain a wholesome and sufficient supply of water? Nature has a hand in these things and they are complex matters. Secondly, as regards the great amenity which local residents have drawn from the river and associated land, this is of course a matter for consideration in the normal operation of the planning system. I am sure the local planning authority will properly exercise its functions and weigh all the different considerations. But that is territory into which I must not stray, since clearly any planning application may come to the Secretary of State for consideration.

I am extremely grateful to the noble Lord for raising this amendment. Yesterday we heard of some of the unprecedented nationalisation that the next Labour Government, whenever that happens—which I hope is never—are to undertake. Let me remind the Committee that it was Sir Hugh Myddelton and King James II who jointly funded the New River to bring to the City of London fresh water from Hertfordshire. This was a major engineering achievement at the time and was also the first private water venture of this sort. No doubt this is why the noble Lord, Lord Graham of Edmonton, is keen to preserve it—to remind our successors of the private enterprise successes.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

May I just record the fact that the discussion in Committee, which the noble Lord so inaccurately recounts, took place not yesterday but the day before.

Lord Graham of Edmonton

The noble Earl, not for the first time, is in a daze. Of course I am very grateful to him for almost word for word reading out that part of my brief which I decided I had not time to read. He certainly did not have my brief, but the facts that he has are incontrovertible. I understand, as does the Minister, that this is an attempt by local authorities to use the Bill to raise a point that concerns them very deeply. I shall certainly not take any action on this clause today.

The Minister will understand, however, that those with whom I shall be in touch will examine very carefully what he said. The Minister certainly said kind things about the need to preserve the amenity. But, quite frankly, he also raised some of the fears that local people have. They are concerned that anything which is not already written in statute may fall. Our anxiety is that the clause we are debating could provide the Minister with the opportunities to enable that to occur. However, I shall consider very carefully what the Minister had to say, and I may come back at a later stage. In the meantime, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 184 agreed to.

Clauses 185 and 186 agreed to.

Clause 187 [Short title, commencement and extent]:

The Earl of Caithness moved Amendment No. 448:

Page 182, line 6, after ("section") insert, (", so much of this Act as confers any power to make subordinate legislation or makes provision with respect to the exercise of any such power").

The noble Earl said: In moving this amendment, I wish to speak also to Amendments Nos. 449, 450 and 452. These are technical amendments. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

The Earl of Caithness moved Amendments Nos. 449, 450 and 450A:

Page 182, line 8, after ("Act") insert (", except in so far as they are already in force in accordance with subsection (2) above,").

Page 182, line 10, leave out ("and") and insert ("(including Schedules 5 and 6) and sections").

Page 182, line 11, leave out from first ("to") to end of line 15 and insert ("V of Part II, except section (restrictions on power to make connection and certain other charges);").

The noble Earl said: I beg to move Amendments Nos. 449 to 450A en bloc. Amendment No. 450A is consequential on Amendment No. 345AB which we discussed and agreed yesterday.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 451 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

The Earl of Caithness moved Amendment No. 451A:

Page 182, line 17, after ("IV") insert (", except so far as relating to the amendment in Schedule 16 to the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries (Protection) (Scotland) Act 1951").

The noble Earl said; In moving this amendment, I wish to speak also to Amendments Nos. 415B and 454. These are purely technical amendments. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

The Earl of Caithness moved Amendments Nos. 451B, 452, 453 and 454:

Page 182, line 17, at end insert—

("(ee) Part V and Schedules 21 and 22 except so far as relating to sections 33,47 and 48 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974;").

Page 182, line 18, leave out ("except so far as relating to the making of subordinate legislation").

Page 183, line 4, at end insert—

("( ) section (Indemnities in respect of fluoridation.);").

Page 183, line 14, leave out subsection (8) and insert— ("(8) The following provisions of this Act shall extend to Scotland only (subject, in the case of paragraph (a) below, to the application of sections 21 and 22 of the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries (Protection) (Scotland) Act 1951 to any provision of that Act) namely—

  1. (a) subsection (5) of section 137 above and Schedule 16 to this Act so far as they amend section 15 of the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries (Protection) (Scotland) Act 1951;
    2. 384
  2. (b) Part V and Schedules 21 and 22;
  3. (c) section 183 and Schedule 24 so far as they amend the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 1949, the Rivers (Prevention of Pollution) (Scotland) Act 1951, the Valuation and Rating (Scotland) Act 1956 and the Water (Scotland) Act 1980;
  4. (d) section 183 and Part I of Schedule 26 . 3 far as they relate to section 104 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974.").

The noble Earl said: I beg to move Amendments Nos. 451B to 454 en bloc. All of them are consequential. These are the last amendments of eight long days of Committee. I am very grateful for the spirit in which all the Members of the Committee have taken part in the proceedings. We have made a number of concessions to the Committee, and as dawn breaks at the end of the eighth day so dawn is breaking for a new look for water which will be better for the country. We have a lot of work to do to meet some of the concerns that have been expressed. I wish to thank all the Members of the Committee and all the Officers of the Chamber for their kind behaviour. I am sorry to have kept them up until such a late hour this morning.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

Before the Question is even put, I shall take the opportunity of concurring with what the noble Earl has said both about the Members of the Committee who have taken part in this Committee stage and about the Officers and servants of the Chamber who have put in exceptional duty over the past month. There are many things still to be done on Report and the time allotted for that will clearly not be adequate. However, as the noble Earl said, we have made some progress, although some of it was against the wishes of the Government. The Bill is already better. Let us hope that we can continue with that improvement.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Clause 187, as amended, agreed to.

House resumed: Bill reported with amendments.